6 ms·

Can you help me understand what aspect of teaching biology in grades k through 3 would be against the provisions of the law in Florida? I studied biology to age

Can you help me understand what aspect of teaching biology in grades k through 3 would be against the provisions of the law in Florida? I studied biology to age 16 in England (“o-levels”) and don’t recall anything even up to that age that would be covered under this law? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Parental_Rights_in_Education_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Parental_Rights_in_E...

tombert 3y ago
Because it's not just grades K through 3 anymore [1]. The law is pretty broad and moreover the legal costs default to the defendant. Even if my wife didn't do something that was officially illegal, we'd be stuck counter-suing to reclaim legal costs. [1] https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/florida-education-board-approves-expanding-parental-rights-law-through-12th-grade https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/florida-education-board-ap...
- ghufran_syed 3y ago
  Thanks for the info - but this implies that following the state curriculum would be a pretty easy defence, wouldn't it? So if a teacher wanted to teach about "sexual orientation and gender identity", even outside of the "existing state standards", they could still do so as part of "reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" [1] [2]. The closest reference I can find for the legal stuff is here: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/... Everything in that text talks about the parent taking legal action against the school district, not the teacher [3] - same as when citizens sue "the cops", they are usually suing the city that runs that police department, not the individual police officer. So if a teacher is following the rules laid down by their employer (which one assumes would be in accordance with state law), they would presumably be provided counsel by their employer in order to ensure that the employer can actually mount a legal defense? So it sounds no different to being a state employee in a lot of places. Or am I still missing something? [1] "The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity through 12th grade unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" [2] "Educators have said they don’t expect a major change in lesson plans given that teachers adhere to state education curriculums" [3] "If a concern is not resolved by the school district, a 129 parent may: ... (I) [elided] (II) Bring an action against the school district to obtain a declaratory judgment that the school district procedure or practice violates this paragraph and seek injunctive relief. A court may award damages and shall award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to a parent who receives declaratory or injunctive relief. "
  - rayiner 3y ago
    > they could still do so as part of "reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" Wait, so it’s okay to teach about sexuality in the class where it’s most likely to be a relevant topic of discussion?
  - tombert 3y ago
    Sure, but when there’s zero repercussions to a frivolous lawsuit, there’s likely to be a frivolous lawsuit. If a parent can easily lie and try and extort money, it can still be an awful, expensive, exhausting process for my wife. Even if it doesn’t cost us any money directly (which to be completely honest I don’t buy), there’s still the exhausting and awful process of having to defend herself in court. Edit: I would also like to point out that even if you were right on the technicalities, you understand why this would be an immensely unappealing thing for a prospective teacher. It would be much easier to simply move to a state that doesn’t have a vague, poorly defined, conspiratorial law that is likely to make our lives unpleasant.
    - ghufran_syed 3y ago
      that makes sense - in my line of work, lawsuits are an occupational hazard, I imagine it should not be the case for teachers! But I also think both that it’s easy to overstate the risk of some of these things and it would completely suck to be on the receiving end It’ll be interesting to see if the pay rate generally goes up for teachers in florida if they end up with many other teachers making that same decision
    - skissane 3y ago
      > you understand why this would be an immensely unappealing thing for a prospective teacher Does how it is experienced depend on which “tribe” the teacher is more aligned with? I imagine a teacher who feels closer to the “blue tribe” is going to experience this as an attack on them and their profession, while a “red tribe” teacher is more likely to feel that the target is someone other than them, and may even agree with the law (or at least the intention behind it). I know US teachers (and public school especially) tend to skew more “blue” than “red”, but I think the latter group are likely a larger percentage of them than many would think, especially in “red states”.
currymj 3y ago
a lot of the fear is not so much not what the law says, but how a local school administration or local judge decides to interpret it after arbitrary complaints by parents. even if you’re eventually ruled to comply with the law it could make your life pretty miserable.
vkou 3y ago
It's K-12 now. But, of course, when they started going down that road, we were all assured, on this very forum, that it's not going to get to this point.

tombert 3y ago

Because it's not just grades K through 3 anymore [1]. The law is pretty broad and moreover the legal costs default to the defendant. Even if my wife didn't do something that was officially illegal, we'd be stuck counter-suing to reclaim legal costs. [1] https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/florida-education-board-approves-expanding-parental-rights-law-through-12th-grade https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/florida-education-board-ap...

ghufran_syed 3y ago
Thanks for the info - but this implies that following the state curriculum would be a pretty easy defence, wouldn't it? So if a teacher wanted to teach about "sexual orientation and gender identity", even outside of the "existing state standards", they could still do so as part of "reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" [1] [2]. The closest reference I can find for the legal stuff is here: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/... Everything in that text talks about the parent taking legal action against the school district, not the teacher [3] - same as when citizens sue "the cops", they are usually suing the city that runs that police department, not the individual police officer. So if a teacher is following the rules laid down by their employer (which one assumes would be in accordance with state law), they would presumably be provided counsel by their employer in order to ensure that the employer can actually mount a legal defense? So it sounds no different to being a state employee in a lot of places. Or am I still missing something? [1] "The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity through 12th grade unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" [2] "Educators have said they don’t expect a major change in lesson plans given that teachers adhere to state education curriculums" [3] "If a concern is not resolved by the school district, a 129 parent may: ... (I) [elided] (II) Bring an action against the school district to obtain a declaratory judgment that the school district procedure or practice violates this paragraph and seek injunctive relief. A court may award damages and shall award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to a parent who receives declaratory or injunctive relief. "
- rayiner 3y ago
  > they could still do so as part of "reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take" Wait, so it’s okay to teach about sexuality in the class where it’s most likely to be a relevant topic of discussion?
- tombert 3y ago
  Sure, but when there’s zero repercussions to a frivolous lawsuit, there’s likely to be a frivolous lawsuit. If a parent can easily lie and try and extort money, it can still be an awful, expensive, exhausting process for my wife. Even if it doesn’t cost us any money directly (which to be completely honest I don’t buy), there’s still the exhausting and awful process of having to defend herself in court. Edit: I would also like to point out that even if you were right on the technicalities, you understand why this would be an immensely unappealing thing for a prospective teacher. It would be much easier to simply move to a state that doesn’t have a vague, poorly defined, conspiratorial law that is likely to make our lives unpleasant.
  - ghufran_syed 3y ago
    that makes sense - in my line of work, lawsuits are an occupational hazard, I imagine it should not be the case for teachers! But I also think both that it’s easy to overstate the risk of some of these things and it would completely suck to be on the receiving end It’ll be interesting to see if the pay rate generally goes up for teachers in florida if they end up with many other teachers making that same decision
  - skissane 3y ago
    > you understand why this would be an immensely unappealing thing for a prospective teacher Does how it is experienced depend on which “tribe” the teacher is more aligned with? I imagine a teacher who feels closer to the “blue tribe” is going to experience this as an attack on them and their profession, while a “red tribe” teacher is more likely to feel that the target is someone other than them, and may even agree with the law (or at least the intention behind it). I know US teachers (and public school especially) tend to skew more “blue” than “red”, but I think the latter group are likely a larger percentage of them than many would think, especially in “red states”.

currymj 3y ago

a lot of the fear is not so much not what the law says, but how a local school administration or local judge decides to interpret it after arbitrary complaints by parents. even if you’re eventually ruled to comply with the law it could make your life pretty miserable.

vkou 3y ago

It's K-12 now. But, of course, when they started going down that road, we were all assured, on this very forum, that it's not going to get to this point.